Posted on 04/28/2009 10:20:05 AM PDT by DesertRenegade
It was only five years ago that opposition to gay marriage was so strong that Republicans explicitly turned to the issue as a way to energize conservative voters. Yet today, as the party contemplates the task of rebuilding itself, some Republicans say the issue of gay marriage may be turning into more of a hindrance than a help.
The fact that a run of states have legalized gay marriage in recent months — either by court decision or by legislative action — with little backlash is only one indication of how public attitudes about this subject appear to be changing.
More significant is evidence in polls of a widening divide on the issue by age, suggesting to many Republicans that the potency of the gay-marriage question is on the decline. It simply does not appear to have the resonance with younger voters that it does with older ones.
Consider this: In the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, released on Monday, 31 percent of respondents over the age of 40 said they supported gay marriage. By contrast, 57 percent under age 40 said they supported it, a 26-point difference. Among the older respondents, 35 percent said they opposed any legal recognition of same-sex couples, be it marriage or civil unions. Among the younger crowd, just 19 percent held that view.
Steve Schmidt, who was the senior strategist to Senator John McCain of Arizona during his presidential campaign, said in a speech and an interview that Republicans were in danger of losing these younger voters unless the party comes to appreciate how issues like gay marriage resonate, or do not resonate, with them.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
They wish.
Exactly, they wish.
Not only “might” there be a third party, there most definitely will BE a third party if the GOP goes that direction.
To the NYT: Really?
Then why did Californistan vote down the gay bill that they had on the ballot?
If gay marriage is so accepted these days, why did the most liberal state known vote against it?
(Which, of course, set off a storm of court briefs and legal wrangling to subvert the will of the people..)
the NYT is trying to create news and shape the opinions based on its complicit (and probably closetted) McCain “advisor” pal.
The NYT is sick and disgusting! They preach their opinions as ‘news.’
With the departure of Specter today, it is obvious that the “Conservative Revolution” in the GOP has started and is gaining momentum.
The liberals need to get it through their thick heads that we are a CONSERVATIVE PARTY and proudly pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-gun, anti-illegal immigration, and pro-small government.
The days of the RINOs running our party are over! They are being shown the door!
So the NYT wishes the GOP would endorse same sex marriage, what a shock.
Taking “helpful” advice from your sworn enemy is the very definition of idiocy.
They are trying to PROJECT this as FACT....repeat it enough, they figure and it will be believed....HA...
They swindled Mr. Steele into mouthing off at Rush.
Huh?!?
Gay marriage couldn’t even pass in California, how in the hell would they conclude that it is “popular”.
I think the rinos should go with Specter and declare themselves rats.
Crock of Schmidt!
Adam and Eve, not Adam Nagourney and Steve Schmidt.
Not only “might” there be a third party, there most definitely will BE a third party if the GOP goes that direction.
You are right - it’s time for OUR change - a party that represents conservative values and doesn’t consider them terrorist values! I see Spector went over to the dark side - maybe we will see more of that. He was really a dem anyway.
We seek the passage of a Federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and oppose all attempts everywhere to redefine marriage as being anything but what it has always been: the union of one man and one woman. Since the natural family is the basic God-given institution of our civilization, and the nursery of our future, it must be protected from all who would destroy it.
It’s funny how pervs in my home state are fighting so hard to keep perv “marriage” off the ballot here.One would think that *here* perv marriage would coast to victory just like it did in CA (twice).
If they do, it's hasta la vista Republicana. RIP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.